Wrong nicotine content in eliquid

Status
Not open for further replies.

squee

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 12, 2013
478
815
Central CT
Well, this doesn't help :facepalm:

Researchers found that 61 percent of the e-cigarettes they bought at 14 vape shops and 16 tobacco specialty stores had nicotine levels at least 10 percent higher or lower than the label showed.
The industry’s own American e-liquid Manufacturing Standards Association requires that nicotine content be within 10 percent of the labeled content, the health department said.
---
Seventy-three of the 120 samples had nicotine content that veered from its packaging by as much as 88 percent less than the label to 840 percent more.

Article - Many e-cigs' labels show wrong nicotine content, Salt Lake County Health Department study shows | The Salt Lake Tribune
Study: Ow.ly - image uploaded by @SLCoHealth (SaltLakeCountyHealth)
 

Kent C

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 12, 2009
26,547
60,051
NW Ohio US
IF there is even a true 'study', I'd like to see it. Without that and the methodology used, I simply don't believe it.

Here's Kathy Garrett from an earlier hit piece:

"Big Tobacco says it’s not as bad as a normal cigarette, but Salt Lake County Health Department Tobacco Prevention Program Manager Kathy Garrett disagrees.

“It’s still nicotine and it’s not FDA approved or regulated. So we really do not know what are in them,” said Garrett.

Garrett says companies are blatantly targeting kids with wacky flavors any kid would like. Chocolate, Apple, and orange soda flavors top the list.

Not only is it illegal for kids or anyone under the age of 19 to use these electronic nicotine sticks, but Garrett says Utah’s Indoor Clean Air Act means even an adult can’t use them in public places like schools, clubs, or businesses. But because of their small size, it’s easy to conceal."


More Kids Using E-Cigarettes - Good4Utah.com

She's no 'scientist' - just another smoke-free advocate hack.
 

Augmented Dog

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jul 8, 2014
2,187
10,949
Philadelphia, PA USA
Both links refer e-cigarettes. There is no specific mention of e-liquids. This is confusing and possibly misleading.
Additionally, specific brands are not mentioned. I'd think that little bit o'info is damned important.
Were they sampling cigalikes? Juices? What and where were their samples manufactured? By whom?
I've become sick and tired of "studies" publishing results based on anonymous products. Without specifics, the published results mean less than nothing, but will be used to discredit the responsible vendor, maker and general practice of vaping.
This all just sounds like another witch hunt aimed at vilifying the whole of the vaping community.
 

Kent C

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 12, 2009
26,547
60,051
NW Ohio US
Both links refer e-cigarettes. There is no specific mention of e-liquids. This is confusing and possibly misleading.
Additionally, specific brands are not mentioned. I'd think that little bit o'info is damned important.
Were they sampling cigalikes? Juices? What and where were their samples manufactured? By whom?
I've become sick and tired of "studies" publishing results based on anonymous products. Without specifics, the published results mean less than nothing, but will be used to discredit the responsible vendor, maker and general practice of vaping.
This all just sounds like another witch hunt aimed at vilifying the whole of the vaping community.

Exactly my thoughts... which is why I would like to see 'method' of testing. One could extract a concentrated nicotine from one part of a cartomizer or an area of none. I'm not saying there hasn't been bogus mg labels - we've seen it here, but I think 'more info' on what methods used, etc. is needed. From her K.Garrett's earlier pieces, I wouldn't trust her as she's way to biased against ecigs and that is quite evident.
 

Augmented Dog

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jul 8, 2014
2,187
10,949
Philadelphia, PA USA
Exactly my thoughts... which is why I would like to see 'method' of testing. One could extract a concentrated nicotine from one part of a cartomizer or an area of none. I'm not saying there hasn't been bogus mg labels - we've seen it here, but I think 'more info' on what methods used, etc. is needed. From her K.Garrett's earlier pieces, I wouldn't trust her as she's way to biased against ecigs and that is quite evident.

Agreed.

10char
 

csardaz

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
May 29, 2014
169
147
Pennsylvania
There was a BT lab speaker at the recent FDA workshop who had tested nicotine degradation under extreme conditions - hot and dry and hot and humid - and found a 70% loss of nicotine in ecigs. I forget if it was 6months or 1year. In any case, the level of nic at the time of manufacture is higher than what you get at 1month, 3month etc and it depends on storage conditions (temperature and light) . You need a short expiration date or refrigerated storage if you want an ejuice off-the-shelf to be +- 10% from its label. Dark-glass bottles would help some.

But How Much does it matter if your juice is labeled 12mg but is actually 13 or 10?
 

zoiDman

My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 16, 2010
41,620
1
84,746
So-Cal
There was a BT lab speaker at the recent FDA workshop who had tested nicotine degradation under extreme conditions - hot and dry and hot and humid - and found a 70% loss of nicotine in ecigs. I forget if it was 6months or 1year. In any case, the level of nic at the time of manufacture is higher than what you get at 1month, 3month etc and it depends on storage conditions (temperature and light) . You need a short expiration date or refrigerated storage if you want an ejuice off-the-shelf to be +- 10% from its label. Dark-glass bottles would help some.

But How Much does it matter if your juice is labeled 12mg but is actually 13 or 10?

This is by No Means a definitive analysis but an Interesting read all the same.

Madvapes Blog - Nicotine Concentration Over Time

BTW - If anyone has Better Information about Nicotine Degradation, Please can you post a Link.
 

bigdancehawk

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jan 27, 2010
1,462
5,477
Kansas City, Missouri
Actually, much of this criticism may not be warranted. The project summary specifically states that they obtained 153 samples of e-liquids in strengths ranging from 0 mg to 24 mg. They obtained the samples from 14 vape shops and 16 "tobacco specialty stores." The methodology was liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry.

Ow.ly - image uploaded by @SLCoHealth (SaltLakeCountyHealth)

EDIT: I think this just confirms what we should have known already: the unfortunate reality that there are quite a few careless people making e-juice.
 
Last edited:

Kent C

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 12, 2009
26,547
60,051
NW Ohio US
Actually, much of this criticism may not be warranted. The project summary specifically states that they obtained 153 samples of e-liquids in strengths ranging from 0 mg to 24 mg. They obtained the samples from 14 vape shops and 16 "tobacco specialty stores." The methodology was liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry.

Ow.ly - image uploaded by @SLCoHealth (SaltLakeCountyHealth)

EDIT: I think this just confirms what we should have known already: the unfortunate reality that there are quite a few careless people making e-juice.

I saw that. I was more concerned with the methodology of extraction - from disposables, cartos, bottles??
 

zoiDman

My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 16, 2010
41,620
1
84,746
So-Cal
Actually, much of this criticism may not be warranted. The project summary specifically states that they obtained 153 samples of e-liquids in strengths ranging from 0 mg to 24 mg. They obtained the samples from 14 vape shops and 16 "tobacco specialty stores." The methodology was liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry.

Ow.ly - image uploaded by @SLCoHealth (SaltLakeCountyHealth)

EDIT: I think this just confirms what we should have known already: the unfortunate reality that there are quite a few careless people making e-juice.

What I found Interesting is when the report stated that the AEMSA Standard Requires all products to be +/- 10% Nicotine Content.

I wonder How Many readers realized that the Only Retailers/OEMs that fall under this Requirement are those who are AEMSA Members?
 
Last edited:

Kent C

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 12, 2009
26,547
60,051
NW Ohio US
What I found Interesting is when the report stated that the AEMSA Standard Requires all products to be +/- 10% Nicotine Content.

I wonder How Many readers realized that the Only Retailers/OEMs that fall under this Requirement are those who are AEMSA Members?

95%? .....of those who know who/what AEMSA is.
 

Kent C

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 12, 2009
26,547
60,051
NW Ohio US

Oliver

ECF Founder, formerly SmokeyJoe
Admin
Verified Member
The issue with this is not one of public safety (with a caveat - below), but one of customer satisfaction.

Quite simply, there's a high percentage of eliquid manufacturers who are STILL poor quality. Varying nicotine levels is almost certainly a proxy measure for all kinds of other egregiousness.

The caveat is, if someone who really, really wants nicotine buys a mislabelled eliquid with lower levels of nicotine, they are theoretically in danger because of the enhanced risk of their returning to smoking. Spurious argument, of course, but it's the only case I can think of where this would potentially be a safety issue.
 

zoiDman

My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 16, 2010
41,620
1
84,746
So-Cal
...

Quite simply, there's a high percentage of eliquid manufacturers who are STILL poor quality. Varying nicotine levels is almost certainly a proxy measure for all kinds of other egregiousness.

...

Unfortunately, you are correct about this.

I just hate to see things like this Report from Sal Lake City. Because I see No Reason why Salt Lake City should be any different from Denver or Seattle or Atlanta or ________.

And when States start talking about Special Licensing to Sell e-Liquid, it does give one pause.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread